I would lay me and pray the Lord my soul to keep. And no one ever, I believe He heard each prayer for God and God." Evangelical Christians believe many things in common. We all believe in the Bible's absolute authority, and we all believe that faith in Christ is the only way of salvation. The list goes on and on. At the same time, everyone who's been to church more than once or twice soon realizes that Christians don't agree on everything. And in these cases, we must work hard to understand each other, sometimes even agreeing to disagree. In this lesson, we're going to deal with one of the issues that Evangelical Christians often disagree on. We're going to explore who should be baptized, should it only be believers, or should it be believers and their children. Maybe you're like me. I grew up believing that all Bible-believing Christians simply reject infant baptism. I believe that only denominations who add human traditions to the Bible would baptize their children. Then, at one point in my life, I visited a church where they believed the gospel and faithfully taught the Scriptures, but I was shocked to learn that they also baptized their babies. I wondered to myself, how can a church that seems so committed to the Bible baptize infants? What reasons could they possibly have for doing this? We've entitled this lesson, why do we baptize our children? And we're going to look into some of the reasons many Evangelical Christians have for giving the sign of baptism to their children. Many followers of Christ will not agree with the conclusions of this study, but it's still important for all of us to understand why so many are committed to baptizing their children. In this study, we'll look at three topics, which will help us grasp the practice of Internetism. First, we'll ask, what kinds of people God brings to Himself in covenant? In second, we'll see how baptism became the sign of God's covenant. Then third, we'll examine the meaning of baptism as a sign of the covenant. As we look carefully at these three topics, we'll be able to understand why many Evangelicals baptize their children. Let's begin by looking at the kinds of people God brings to Himself in covenant. Have you ever noticed how hard it is to get people to change the way they think after they believe something for a long time? A kind of mental momentum builds up over time, and it's very hard to break it. In many ways, the Bible creates momentum on certain things by repeating these things over and over again. The same patterns appear time and again to teach us that this is the way God wants us to think and live. When we explore the identity of God's covenant people, we'll see that a momentum builds as the Bible repeats the same perspective's time and again on what kinds of people belong to the people of the covenant. In general terms, a biblical covenant is a solemn relationship which God establishes between Himself and His servant people. And it's common to speak of six major covenants between God and His people. The covenants with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and Christ. These six covenants may be gathered into three groups. First, God made universal covenants with all of humanity through Adam in Genesis 2 and 3. And He did the same through Noah in Genesis 6, 8, and 9. In the second place, God made special national covenants with the nation of Israel. His covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15 and 17 established Abraham's family as God's special covenant people and promised them land and posterity. God's covenant with Moses brought God's law to Israel, especially in Exodus chapters 19 through 24. And God's covenant with David established a permanent dynasty over Israel in 2 Samuel chapter 7, Psalm 89 and Psalm 132. In the third place, the last covenant of the Bible is the covenant with Christ or the new covenant, which appears in the teachings of the Old Testament prophets and in the New Testament. We could say many things about these six biblical covenants, but we're particularly concerned with the kinds of people God brought into these covenant relationships. We'll see that the people of every covenant may be characterized in at least two ways. First, both believers and unbelievers were included in each covenant. Second, each covenant included adults and their children. Let's look first at how biblical covenants included both believers and unbelievers. Many modern Christians think that being in covenant with God is the same as being saved. According to this view, everyone who is born again is in covenant with God and everyone who's not born again is not in covenant with God. When we look at the Bible carefully, we find that this outlook is not entirely correct. In the first place, God's covenants with Adam and Noah were made with the entire human race and included believers and unbelievers. Scriptures teach very plainly that we're all included in God's covenant with Adam regardless of our faith commitments, and God's covenant with Noah also extends to the entire human race, whether we are believers or unbelievers. All human beings benefit from the stable universe God promised in the days of Noah. A similar pattern appears in the second group of covenants, the national covenants God made with Abraham, Moses, and David. Although there were always true believers in the nation of Israel, many physical descendants of Abraham, Moses, and David who were in covenant with God still rejected the true faith and they came under God's judgment. The national covenants with Abraham, Moses, and David included many Israelites who were not redeemed from their sins. Even though the privileges and responsibilities of the covenant came to all the people of Israel, salvation came only to those Israelites who put their personal faith in God for salvation. Just like the universal covenants earlier in the Bible, the national covenants with Israel also included believers and unbelievers. Now we come to the new covenant in Christ. Does the same arrangement hold in this covenant as well? Does it include both believers and unbelievers? When we look at the New Testament, we see that even the covenant with Christ includes people who are not truly saved. The people of the visible church are the people of the new covenant community, and we all know that the rosters of most churches have at least some unbelievers. They may have made professions of faith, they may claim to be followers of Christ, but the visible church of Christ is a mixed bag, having both genuine believers and unbelievers. Once we realize that the church contains both believers and unbelievers, it should not surprise us at all that the New Testament speaks of unbelievers alongside true believers as being in covenant with God, even in the New Testament. In the book of Hebrews, we find a remarkable passage that warns against turning away from Christ because of this special covenant relationship. In Hebrews, chapter 10, verse 26 and 27, we read these words. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. We should not be confused and think that this passage is talking about losing salvation. The Bible makes it very clear that we cannot lose salvation once we actually have received it. Instead, this passage warns church members who are not true believers that judgment will come on them if they continue in their evil ways. Just after this passage, in Hebrews chapter 10, verses 29 and 30, we find another warning to those in the church who are tempted to turn away from Christ. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, it is mine to avenge, I will repay, and again the Lord will judge his people. Notice how this passage describes the people it warns against turning from Christ. People who turn away from the Christian faith are judged because they treat as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them. Now in this context, sanctified does not mean redeemed or saved, it simply means that they are set apart from the world. But notice here that even people who prove they are not true believers by their turning from Christ, they have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant. They are set apart from the world and they are in covenant with God. This passage indicates that like Old Testament covenants, the New Testament covenant includes some unbelievers. Many well-meaning Christians often hold that there can be no unbelievers in the New Covenant. Their outlook is based primarily on Jeremiah chapter 31 verses 31 through 34, a passage which describes the New Covenant of Christ in remarkable ways. In Jeremiah 31, 31, we read these words. The time is coming to clear the Lord when I will make a new covenant. Then God continues to describe this covenant in chapter 31 verses 33 and 34. I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor or a man his brother saying, no the Lord, because they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest declares the Lord, but I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more. Many Christians believe that only true believers are in the New Covenant because God said in this passage they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest, and I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more. But to understand this prophecy correctly, we must always remember that this passage also says something else about the New Covenant. In verse 34, the prophet said, no longer will a man teach his neighbor or a man his brother saying, no the Lord. In other words, this vision of the New Covenant says that there will also be no need for preachers and teachers to correct God's people or to call for repentance. But we know that even in our time of the New Covenant, it is necessary to have preachers and teachers. Jeremiah said we will not need them in the New Covenant, but we still do. How can we understand this? To understand the fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecy correctly, we have to remember that the New Covenant has not yet reached its full glory. The blessings of the New Covenant began when Christ first came to earth, and they continue in our day. Yet the full measure of the New Covenant blessings predicted by Jeremiah will take place only when Christ returns at the end of our age. When Christ returns, the New Covenant people will consist only of true believers because He will then judge and eliminate the wicked. But now we have to preach and teach, no the Lord, even in the New Covenant community, because this community includes people who do not know the Lord. This orientation toward the covenants of the Bible helps us understand something about infant baptism. Evangelicals who baptize their children don't believe that this act actually saves their children. This is not the case at all. Baptism never saves anyone. Instead, we believe that baptism brings people into covenant with God. Yet Christ covenant has both believers and unbelievers within it. Out of all the people in the world who are baptized in Christ's name, only those who have genuine and enduring faith are saved. Even baptized children must personally trust Christ to be saved. Now, having seen that being in covenant with God is not the same as being saved, we're in a position to see another dynamic operating among the people of the covenant. Throughout the Bible, covenant privileges and responsibilities come not just to adults, but also to their children. In our modern world, it's normal to think of people building relationships simply as individuals. Many times we form friendships, we enter into legal contracts and even choose marriage partners as if these people were simply isolated individuals. We don't even consider the relationships we're establishing with their families, and we hardly think about their children and their grandchildren to come. Now, as popular as it is to live in this individualistic way today, such individualism does not appear in the Bible. In fact, the Scriptures teach that God never made covenant with adults without also making covenant with their children. Scriptures make it clear that Adam's relationship with God looked beyond Adam to his descendants, the entire human race. We often speak of Adam as our federal or covenant representative. His relationship with God brought all of his physical descendants into relationship with God. The same principle applies to God's covenant with Noah. Noah's children were of special concern to God when he entered into covenant with Noah. Listen to what God said to Noah in Genesis chapter 6, verse 18. I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark, you and your sons, and your wife, and your sons' wives with you. Noah's children had a special role in God's covenant with him. In a similar way, Abraham's covenant also included his children, the people of Israel. In Genesis chapter 17 and verse 7, we read these words, I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. This focus on Abraham's children continued the pattern established with Adam and Noah. God brought adults into covenant along with their children. The covenant with Moses also had in view the children of Israel. We see this in many places, but consider what God said in the third commandment. In Exodus chapter 20, verses 5 and 6, we read these words, I, the Lord, your God, and the jealous God, punishing the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. Once again, we see that the children of adults are brought into covenant with God. Finally, the covenant with David also included David's children. God promised that David's family would be Israel's royal dynasty through all generations. In Psalm 132, verses 11 and 12, God said these words to David. The Lord swore in oath to David a sure oath that he will not revoke, one of your own descendants I will place on your throne. If your sons keep my covenant and the statues I teach them, then their sons will sit on your throne forever and ever. David's royal covenant extended beyond David to his children and future generations. From this quick survey of Old Testament covenants, we see a pattern repeated again and again. God made his covenants with adults and their children. These children were not necessarily saved, they still had to exercise personal faith to be redeemed from their sins, yet the children of the covenant were special in God's eyes. They had privileges and responsibilities that people outside the covenant did not have. God promised that if they pursued their relationships with him by faith, they would inherit the blessings of the covenant, but if they did not, they would fall under its curses. Now we have to ask another question. Does this same pattern extend to the new covenant in Christ? Does the New Testament teach that God's covenants included both adults and their children? When we look at the New Testament against the momentum established in every Old Testament covenant, we see that several passages indicate that the New Covenant includes both adults and their children. The children of the believers in the New Covenant have unique privileges and responsibilities before God. We'll look at two of the many passages that demonstrate that New Covenant children are special in the eyes of God. First, Acts 2 verses 38 through 39 records the words Peter preached on the day of Pentecost. There he said, repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, for all whom the Lord our God will call. At the end of these verses, Peter acknowledged that God will call many to himself who are not present in Jerusalem, but notice how Peter spoke of the people before him on that day. His priorities reflected the structures of Old Testament covenants. He said that the promise of the Holy Spirit was first for you referring to the adults who would believe, and second for your children, meaning the children of those who would believe. Peter's perspective reflected the Old Testament covenant pattern of believers and their children. The children of the people before him would receive the same offer of salvation that their parents received. They were the expected, though not necessary, heirs of the covenant blessings. A second example of this teaching appears in 1 Corinthians chapter 7 verse 14, where Paul wrote these words, the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband, otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. Notice that Paul said the children of believers are holy. Once again in this context, holy means set apart from the world, special in the eyes of God. It's clear from this passage that Paul believes that the children of believers are not treated like the children of unbelievers. They are included in the New Covenant God made in Christ. So we see that the New Covenant follows the structure of Old Testament Covenants in that it includes both adults and their children, and it gives them both special privileges and responsibilities. Now, whether we accept a reject infant baptism, all Christians should understand that their children are in covenant with God. Many Christians believe that this supports the practice of infant baptism while others do not. In any case, we should all recognize that God has a special place in his heart in his covenant for the children of believers. Our children are special gifts from God, and they are the expected heirs of the covenant of grace in Christ. And as we consider the question of infant baptism, we must always keep this precious truth in mind. Now that we have seen how the people of the covenant always included both adults and their children, we are in a position to look at our second topic, the development of baptism as a sign of the covenant. When we get to know new friends, it's often very helpful to ask questions about them and about their life story. Where were you born? Where did you go to school? What kinds of things have you done with your life? We ask these kinds of questions because our backgrounds shape us in so many ways. Well, the same is true when it comes to understanding baptism. We need to see how baptism developed during the New Testament period into the sign of God's covenant people. And we'll explore this development by looking at three stages in the history of baptism. First, Old Testament temple washings. Second, the baptism administered by John the Baptist. And third, baptism administered by the apostles. Let's look first at Old Testament temple washings. In the days of the Old Testament temple, God commanded the Israelites to purify themselves before they came to worship. In Exodus and Leviticus, we find that different kinds of corruptions from everyday life and even personal sins made people unfit to approach God in his temple. As a result, the people were commanded on many occasions to cleanse themselves through ritual washings. Through these washings, the people of God removed the corruption of the world and they were made acceptable to enter into God's presence at the temple. This Old Testament background helps us understand why the apostle Paul described the New Testament symbol of baptism as a sign of cleansing. In Ephesians chapter 5 verses 25 and 26, he wrote that Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the Word. New Testament baptism has its roots in Old Testament washing rituals. It symbolizes the cleansing that enables God's covenant people to approach him without fear of divine judgment. With this Old Testament background in mind, we should look at the first man who practiced baptism in the New Testament. John the Baptist. John the Baptist ministered near the Jordan River and called the people of Israel to repent and be baptized. Well, John was not doing something entirely new. In the time between the Old and New Testaments, the Jews used baptism or ritual washings in at least two different ways. First, when Gentiles converted to Judaism, not only were the males circumcised but males and females alike were baptized to cleanse them of their pagan ways. This was one of the chief ways the Jews used baptism in the days of John the Baptist. Now, of course, John the Baptist did not baptize Gentiles. He baptized Jews. In doing this, John followed a second practice that many religious groups in Israel performed in his day. There were many small sects of Jews in John's day, each of which considered itself to be the true remnant of God's people. These radical groups considered ordinary Jews corrupted and defiled so they required baptism of any Jew who wanted to join their group. Baptism allowed these corrupted Jews to wash away the past associations and to join a new faithful remnant. Now, it's not difficult to see that this is the origin of John's baptism. He was a faithful Jew preparing the way for Christ by calling the corrupt people of Israel to abandon their evil ways. We read in Matthew chapter 3 verses 5 and 6 that people went out to John from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan, confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan river. John stood on the banks of the river Jordan and challenged his fellow Jews to repent and to demonstrate their faith through baptism. Although they were circumcised, John rightly believed that the vast majority of Jews in his day needed to be baptized in order to be cleansed and to join his small remnant of the righteous in Israel. Old Testament temple washings and John's baptism of Jews provide a background for Christian baptism but they do not explain its full development as the sign of God's covenant. To understand more, we must consider the ministries of Jesus and the apostles. Jesus came to John the Baptist to identify himself with the righteous remnant of Israel, and as a result of this identification, Jesus also ordained his disciples to baptize his followers. One of the last commands Christ gave is the well-known verse of Matthew chapter 28 verse 19. Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Jesus expected his disciples to baptize the new covenant people he was calling to himself. Baptism was the symbol of their cleansing from the world's corruption. We must always remember, however, that in the early years of Christ's kingdom, the gospel went forth primarily to Jews. These Jews had already received circumcision, the Old Testament sign of the covenant, but Jesus also required that the sign of baptism be added to circumcision. At first, both circumcision and baptism marked the remnant of Jews who followed the true Messiah. While the early Christian church remained largely Jewish, baptism was simply added to circumcision. But when Gentile nations began to follow Christ in large numbers, the role of baptism developed even further. Unfortunately, Jesus had not given clear instructions on what to do about Gentile believers. So, in Acts chapter 15, we read that the apostles convened an assembly in Jerusalem to settle the matter. At this assembly, Peter, Paul, and Barnabas argued that circumcision should not be required of Gentile converts and the assembly ruled in their favor. As James said, in Acts 15, verse 19, we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. From that day forward, circumcision was no longer required of God's people, and baptism became the only sign of the covenant. So, we see that during the time of John the Baptist and Jesus, circumcision and baptism served as dual signs identifying God's covenant people. But in Acts chapter 15, the apostles declared circumcision defunct and left baptism as the sole sign which identified the covenant people. In at least one New Testament passage, this movement from circumcision to baptism is made very clear. Listen to Paul's words in Colossians chapter 2, verses 11 and 12. In Christ, you were also circumcised in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men, but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with Him in baptism. Notice that the circumcision done by Christ is accomplished by baptism. Paul taught that baptism was the New Testament replacement for circumcision. Throughout the history of the church, baptism has been treated as the replacement of circumcision. So, whenever we ask what baptism means, we must draw upon this connection with circumcision. In a word, circumcision once identified God's people and separated them from the world. Now, in the New Testament, it is baptism and not circumcision that marks the covenant community. And, of course, this is one of the many reasons why Christians believe that they should baptize their children. Just as both men and their sons were circumcised in the Old Testament, we believe now that adults and their children should be baptized in the New Testament. The sign of the New Covenant belongs to believers and their children. We have seen that God's covenant always included adults and their children and how baptism developed into a sign for God's covenant people. Now we are in a position to look at our final topic, the significance of baptism as the sign of the covenant. Have you ever noticed that a symbol or sign can mean different things to different people? When a soldier looks at his own flag, patriotic feelings well up within him, but his enemy looks at the same flag and is filled with disgust. A new bride will be filled with joy when she looks at her wedding ring, but the same ring may bring her pain if her husband dies unexpectedly. Symbols have a flexibility to mean different things to us depending on who we are and where we are in life. Something like this is true of the sign of the covenant. In one sense, baptism, like circumcision before it, always means the same thing. It always means that a person is joined to the covenant people. This relationship places people in line for the blessings and the curses of the covenant, but in another sense, baptism carries different significance for different kinds of people. Now to grasp the significance of baptism as a sign of the covenant, we'll look at two issues. First, what does the covenant sign mean to those who receive it after they believe? And what does it mean to those who receive it as infants before they believe? Let's consider first what the covenant sign meant for those who received it as believers. Because baptism is the replacement of circumcision, one of the best ways to approach this issue is to ask what circumcision meant to Abraham. Abraham was the first man to receive circumcision as the sign of his relationship with God. And in Genesis 17, verse 10, God spoke these words to Abraham. This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep. Every male among you shall be circumcised. Now Abraham was an adult who believed before he received circumcision. So he stands as an example of someone who first believed and then received the sign of the covenant. What then was the meaning of this sign for him? Put simply, Abraham's circumcision outwardly expressed an inward reality of his saving faith and the new relationship that he had with God that resulted from his faith. In Romans chapter 4, verse 11, Paul described Abraham's circumcision in this way. Abraham received the sign of circumcision a feel of the righteousness that he had by faith. Notice that for the adult Abraham, the sign of circumcision was a feel of his righteousness. In other words, it demonstrated that Abraham had already believed God and had been redeemed from his sins. Now that baptism has replaced circumcision as the sign of God's covenant, we should expect the same significance for baptism when it is applied to new believers. When men and women profess faith in Christ, there to be given baptism as an outward expression of something that has happened within them and to ratify their new relationship with God. In first Peter chapter 3, verse 21, Peter put the matter in this way. Baptism is not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. For those who believe before they are baptized, the sign of the covenant is a demonstration of faith in Christ. In this respect, all Christians agree. We know that circumcision has been replaced by baptism, so we also understand that when men and women receive Christ as their Savior and are then baptized, they are doing what Abraham did when he was circumcised as an adult. They are demonstrating the change that God has wrought within them. And in this way, the significance of baptism for believers today parallels the significance of circumcision for those who received it after they believed. As important as it is to see this parallel between Old Testament and New Testament covenant signs, we should also look at this issue from another angle. What did Old Testament circumcision mean for those who received it as infants? What did it symbolize for those who did not yet believe? Because baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of the covenant, this perspective on circumcision can help us understand the significance of baptism for our children. It is obvious that circumcision was not a demonstration of faith in the infants of Israel. Instead, it symbolized their participation in the covenant, and it reminded them of their need to have personal faith in God. With adults, an inward change gave rise to an outward sign of circumcision. But the process was the opposite for infants. The outward sign of circumcision called these children to inward change. The process was from the outside again. The prophet Jeremiah demonstrated this outlook when he spoke about spiritual circumcision to Israelites who had been physically circumcised as infants. In Jeremiah 4.4, he made this announcement to Israelites in his day. Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, circumcise your hearts. This statement lets us know the significance of circumcision for infants. It was a sign of the covenant that reminded them of their responsibility to repent and to believe later in life. The circumcised Israelites of Jeremiah's day were called upon to live up to the sign of the covenant that they bore in their flesh. Circumcision meant something very different for children than it did for adults. For those who received it as children, circumcision anticipated the day when they would come to personal saving faith, when they would be circumcised within. Evangelical Christians who believe in infant baptism see a parallel situation for the children of the new covenant. As we have seen, children participate in the new covenant, even if they are not believers. Moreover, we've also seen that baptism replaced circumcision. So it stands to reason that just as Old Testament believers circumcised their children to call their children to faith, Christians should baptize their children to call them to faith as well. Just as God urged, circumcised Israelites to circumcise their hearts later in life, God now urges baptised children today to make baptism and inward reality by trusting in Christ. When our children do profess faith in Christ, the baptism they have already received takes on new meaning for them. It then becomes a demonstration of their new found faith. Just as circumcision meant different things to those who received it as adults and those who received it as infants, Christian baptism also means different things for adults and infants. Now we began this lesson by noting that sincere Christians differ on the matter of infant baptism. Christian histories strongly suggest that we should never expect all followers of Christ to take one position or the other on this matter. We'll always have those who baptize their children and those who do not. Yet it's important for all of us to understand the reasons why so many Christians have practiced infant baptism through the centuries. Among evangelical Christians, this practice rests on the three major pillars we have seen in this study. First, the fact that God's covenant always includes children as expected heirs of the covenant. Second, the fact that baptism replaced the circumcision as the sign of the covenant. And third, the significance of the covenant sign as a call to faith for the children who receive it in infancy. Whether we embrace this outlook or not, every Christian should recognize that the case for infant baptism has much merit. Even when we disagree with each other on this teaching, we can avoid many misunderstandings and we can grow in mutual respect for each other as we understand why so many of us baptize our children.
And God wants to, I knew if I spoke the words he was, the use can take us far away from a simple child, I say. But I am to the place where I first learned that God is for praise. I come that is how they do for God is for